Headlines

Harry Enten

It’s not all Romney’s fault — the economy helped reelect Obama

If you believe Romney lost when he should have won, then he must have made a fatal mistake which needs to be fixed so that Republicans can win again. For Gerson and Wehner, this logic led them down the path of demographics: they conclude that Romney’s biggest problem was a lack of minority outreach in a changing country. I don’t think you can say that Romney had a racial rainbow of support, exactly, but I do want to answer their basic question: did Romney flush away a victory that the economy should have delivered to him?

Actually, Romney always had an uphill battle: the economy narrowly favored President Obama’s re-election. Jamelle Bouie has stated this fact over and over again. John Sides, too, has stated this fact over and over again. Nate Silver has stated this fact over and over again. Have you noticed a pattern here? Smart experts reached the same conclusion. It’s part of the reason we all correctly called a close, but comfortable Obama victory in 2012. It’s why I said way back in September that it wouldn’t be Mitt Romney’s fault if he lost.

What are some people not seeing about the relationship between the economy and elections? For starters, most people don’t vote over absolute numbers, like an unemployment rate of near 8%. Voters choose whether to re-elect based on changes in numbers, like the unemployment rate dropping from 10% in 2009 to 8% in 2012. That’s why voters still overwhelmingly blamed Bush for bad economic conditions and not Obama, even if the unemployment rate remained high in a historical context.

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

I am not sure which is worse… The original Obamification of the Republican party Romney’s supporters subjected us to to ensure his nomination to a post he did not want or this post election forced redemption we are being subjected to.

I disagree. Romney lost because he and the GOP (predictably) never gave anyone a reason to vote FOR him other than the other guy is worse. That doesn’t work.

ddrintn on February 19, 2013 at 11:29 AM

If choosing to reelect a communist as opposed to Romney was not reason enough, then it’s the fault of the individuals who voted 3rd or sat home. That cognitive dissonance was given birth and perpetuated by the media imo.

What are some people not seeing about the relationship between the economy and elections? For starters, most people don’t vote over absolute numbers, like an unemployment rate of near 8%. Voters choose whether to re-elect based on changes in numbers, like the unemployment rate dropping from 10% in 2009 to 8% in 2012. That’s why voters still overwhelmingly blamed Bush for bad economic conditions and not Obama, even if the unemployment rate remained high in a historical context.

But why did the unemployment rate drop? It’s because millions of people left the workforce. And what about other economic figures like the rise in the cost of food, energy, and health care premiums(the latter despite the passage of Obamacare and the promises that came with it). How about the decline in the average household income by $4000 over the course of Obama’s first term?

Was the data all bad? No. The stock market did nearly double(thanks to Bernanke and the Fed). Job creation was stable(albeit mediocre) in the last 3 years. GDP went back into the black the last 3 years and remained there, although it did go negative again in the final quarter of 2012(conveniently AFTER the election had been decided).

True, exit polls did show a large majority of voters continued to blame Bush for the economy, so credit Obama(aided by a corrupt media and ignorant electorate) for successfully pinning the blame for his shortcomings on his predecessor. But at some point, the American people need to wake up and realize that a former President now more than 4 years removed from office is not the reason we’re never able to emerge from this economic malaise we’re mired in. If you’re going to continue to give the sitting President and his party a complete pass then you better not complain when nothing ever seems to improve.

Congressional republicans allowed Obama to postpone any of the natural/needed deflation coming our way with scheduling the tax hikes and spending cuts until after the election. This government spending, temporary lower taxes gives the illusion of a healthier economy. Probably, they are most culpable for obama’s reelection. Took out romneys best issue and delayed needed spending cuts.

Romney, while far from perfect, lost because of a lying corrupt media and an electorate with an insatiable appetite for those lies. End of story.

Kataklysmic on February 19, 2013 at 11:25 AM

I think conservatives need to start becoming more active in combating this meme. “The media,” on its own, is not enough to elect a Democrat. Otherwise Reagan, Bush I, and W would never have won anything. The media hurts us but there is clearly another factor that was at work here given how badly Romney was beaten, plus how badly our Senatorial candidates performed.

I suspect it has to do with the fact that the base seems to have stayed home more than “the media.”

It’s part of the reason we all correctly called a close, but comfortable Obama victory in 2012. It’s why I said way back in September that it wouldn’t be Mitt Romney’s fault if he lost.

Subtext: “So please, GOP voters, don’t think for a second that Romney lost because of his appeal to the ‘conservative base’ or lack thereof. By all means, continue to nominate unelectable moderates so that when they lose we can say ‘it wasn’t their fault; the economy was doing great’ even when you’re in the midst of a 5-year downturn that never seems to end.”

If choosing to reelect a communist as opposed to Romney was not reason enough, then it’s the fault of the individuals who voted 3rd or sat home. That cognitive dissonance was given birth and perpetuated by the media imo.

Mimzey on February 19, 2013 at 11:34 AM

Bull. You nominate a guy who many MANY said was an uninspiring milquetoast and then when he loses you blame voters who were DAMN tired of the browbeating “you’d better vote for that lesser of two evils” game.

If choosing to reelect a communist as opposed to Romney was not reason enough, then it’s the fault of the individuals who voted 3rd or sat home. That cognitive dissonance was given birth and perpetuated by the media imo.

Mimzey on February 19, 2013 at 11:34 AM

No, you have it exactly backward and this attitude permeated the Romney campaign throughout the entire electoral cycle. The Republican party’s job is to earn votes, and it has to sell itself to the voters ultimately. The party needs to act as though every vote is in play and try to excite people to come out and vote. The Republicans aren’t entitled to the base’s votes.

There is no “built in base” whose job is to turn out like brainwashed zombies cycle after cycle. The current theory of politics is that there is a tiny 5% middle which matters, and that everyone else is a zombie which will lurch, drooling mindlessly, to the polls on election day to check off the boxes for the Republicans. We just received an object lesson in 2012 that this is not the case and the Republicans ignore it at their peril.

The media,” on its own, is not enough to elect a Democrat. Otherwise Reagan, Bush I, and W would never have won anything. The media hurts us but there is clearly another factor that was at work here given how badly Romney was beaten, plus how badly our Senatorial candidates performed.

I suspect it has to do with the fact that the base seems to have stayed home more than “the media.”

Doomberg on February 19, 2013 at 11:34 AM

I don’t think the current media environment bears any resembelance to the media enviroment in 2004 which was the last time we won the presidency. I think they are far more brazen in their lies and bias. I also think the electorate has shifted dramatically since even 2008 when prop 8 passed in California of all places.

I also think the electorate has shifted dramatically since even 2008 when prop 8 passed in California of all places.

Kataklysmic on February 19, 2013 at 11:41 AM

Not THAT much. That same electorate is still pretty much against ObamaCare and insane spending levels. That electorate just hasn’t been given a stark choice; and considering the capitulation routine the GOP regularly does after the Te Party- fueled GOP takeover of Congress in 2010, there’s also a lot of cynicism and fatalism.

How so? Someone should have to be convinced that class warfare is a bad choice? If an anorexic dies because they refused to eat, it’s the fault of the people around that person for not making a convincing enough case for eating? I don’t think so.

I suspect it has to do with the fact that the base seems to have stayed home more than “the media.”

Doomberg on February 19, 2013 at 11:34 AM

This meme is getting old. “The base” did not fail to come out to the polls. Have you considered that the Republicans lost a lot of voters during the Bush years? Have you also considered that demographic and cultural trends have been reducing the real and nominal size of the republican “base”?

The Republican party has no one to blame but themselves for going along with progressive policies for decades that have turned away people who just want more freedom and liberty, and have allowed more government dependents to go in to the system. Do you really think those two factors aren’t the most important?

How so? Someone should have to be convinced that class warfare is a bad choice? If an anorexic dies because they refused to eat, it’s the fault of the people around that person for not making a convincing enough case for eating? I don’t think so.

Mimzey on February 19, 2013 at 11:44 AM

When “TrueCon” candidates lose, it’s because they were bad candidates. When squishes lose, it’s because those stupid TrueCons couldn’t realize that the squishes are infinitely better than the “commies”. Please. You folks are just too transparent and that game is no longer valid.

I also think the electorate has shifted dramatically since even 2008 when prop 8 passed in California of all places.

Kataklysmic on February 19, 2013 at 11:41 AM

Not THAT much. That same electorate is still pretty much against ObamaCare and insane spending levels. That electorate just hasn’t been given a stark choice; and considering the capitulation routine the GOP regularly does after the Te Party- fueled GOP takeover of Congress in 2010, there’s also a lot of cynicism and fatalism.

ddrintn on February 19, 2013 at 11:44 AM

I think this is probably correct. Remember too that primary turnout collapsed which should have been a big warning sign that something was going on. That’s why all the “Hispanic vote” stuff is basically nonsense – find out who stayed home in the primaries and why, and you’ll have your solutions.

I’m convinced the party base stayed home because they perceived Romney as being forced on us and didn’t want him, and possibly also because of the clownish nature of many of his competitors.

Voters choose whether to re-elect based on changes in numbers, like the unemployment rate dropping from 10% in 2009 to 8% in 2012. That’s why voters still overwhelmingly blamed Bush for bad economic conditions and not Obama, even if the unemployment rate remained high in a historical context.

That’s not “the economy.” That’s a successful propaganda campaign and collaboration with a complicit media. The unemployment rate would have been above 10% if not for a steep decrease in the work force.

Not THAT much. That same electorate is still pretty much against ObamaCare and insane spending levels. That electorate just hasn’t been given a stark choice; and considering the capitulation routine the GOP regularly does after the Te Party- fueled GOP takeover of Congress in 2010, there’s also a lot of cynicism and fatalism.

ddrintn on February 19, 2013 at 11:44 AM

Yeah, and the republicans have long ago decided to go after the elusive “moderate” vote instead of holding true to any principles that “the base” cares about. They accept the premise that 40% of the vote goes to them, 40% goes to the democrat, and they’re fighting over the remaining 20%, who for some reason they think are “moderate” and just want to hear someone with no opinion on anything.

Some of us are sick of it. You want to govern against my will? Then why would I vote for you over a democrat?

This meme is getting old. “The base” did not fail to come out to the polls. Have you considered that the Republicans lost a lot of voters during the Bush years? Have you also considered that demographic and cultural trends have been reducing the real and nominal size of the republican “base”?

The Republican party has no one to blame but themselves for going along with progressive policies for decades that have turned away people who just want more freedom and liberty, and have allowed more government dependents to go in to the system. Do you really think those two factors aren’t the most important?

Timin203 on February 19, 2013 at 11:46 AM

But this assertion, I can get behind 100%. This is why the party base has finally started not turning out.

The Romney campaign exacerbated this through the challenger’s failure to articulate a clear, positive agenda to address these voters’ fears, and self-inflicted wounds like the “47 percent” gaffe. Given a choice between two unpalatable options, these voters simply stayed home.

Hey look, unemployment unexpectedly dropped to 7.8% five weeks before the election. And positive GDP growth too. How about that! both are quietly reversing again, or just being gradually corrected to once again have a relationship with reality.

Too many “coincidences”. I don’t care what old dinosaurs like Mickey Kaus want to call me a “paranoid“. Better than being an “extinct” fool I reckon.

“the President’s cuts of $716 billion to Medicare, those cuts are going to be restored” – Mitt Romney

So who’s the one playing class warfare here?

sharrukin on February 19, 2013 at 11:48 AM

And that’s another good point — some IDIOT decided to make the campaign about Romney adding additional funding to medicare that we all know will never be cut. Talk about openly pandering to old people. If both dems and repubs are for a bigger, ever expanding welfare state, what difference does it make to me who wins?

The Republican party has no one to blame but themselves for going along with progressive policies for decades that have turned away people who just want more freedom and liberty, and have allowed more government dependents to go in to the system. Do you really think those two factors aren’t the most important?

Timin203 on February 19, 2013 at 11:46 AM

But if that’s the case, then why did the Republicans smoke the Dems in the 2010 midterms? Because the base turned out(along with indie voters and some disaffected Democrats) in droves. That could’ve been duplicated in 2012 but wasn’t. I personally thought Romney ran a far better general election campaign than McCain and was spectacular at the first debate, but he also pulled way too many punches and never consistently took it to Obama the way he needed to.

Not THAT much. That same electorate is still pretty much against ObamaCare and insane spending levels. That electorate just hasn’t been given a stark choice.

ddrintn on February 19, 2013 at 11:44 AM

The electorate claims to be against spending levels, but then balks at entitlement reform. Even those who are ostensibly fiscal conservatives blink when it comes to touching SSI or medicare.

Romney was a poor candidate, but anyone who didn’t see a stark choice being presented to them in this last election wasn’t paying attention (which is the core problem imo.) Choice A was a way to buy time. Choice B was jumping into the ocean with an anvil tied around our ankles.

The Romney campaign exacerbated this through the challenger’s failure to articulate a clear, positive agenda to address these voters’ fears, and self-inflicted wounds like the “47 percent” gaffe. Given a choice between two unpalatable options, these voters simply stayed home.

sharrukin on February 19, 2013 at 11:51 AM

I’m saying that the people who failed to vote are not “the base,” they are most likely people who care about liberty and freedom, which is most certainly not the majority of the republican base. The Republicans spent over 10 years alienating those voters.

When “TrueCon” candidates lose, it’s because they were bad candidates. When squishes lose, it’s because those stupid TrueCons couldn’t realize that the squishes are infinitely better than the “commies”. Please. You folks are just too transparent and that game is no longer valid.

ddrintn on February 19, 2013 at 11:47 AM

Thats not the point I was trying to make.
Regardless of what you point out being accurate or not, my point goes to the ignorance and denial that the choice in the last election was one of choosing between destroying the destruction of the republic by the political force of neo-coms or to stand up for the principles that America was founded on, with the important thing being to STOP the communists….and then argue about “purity” of principles.

In other words, “the base” is shrinking. It’s not like there were a bunch of pro republican fired up voters who didn’t vote. People made a conscious choice not to vote for a Republican. Those folks are not “the base” even if at one point they more or less reliably voted R.

And that’s another good point — some IDIOT decided to make the campaign about Romney adding additional funding to medicare that we all know will never be cut.

Timin203 on February 19, 2013 at 11:53 AM

Well, the thing is I can remember very vividly about 3 years’ worth of incessant propaganda to the effect that Romney just HAD to be the nominee. He represented bland, boring competence and his very blandness would make the election totally a referendum on Obama. That strategy was shown to be the steaming pile of crap that it was, and then it’s the voters’ fault.

Ironically, now with the full-court-press marketing of Rubio, “charisma” and “rock-star appeal” and “thin resume” is all the rage. Well, as long as that’s a qualifier ONLY for Rubio, of course.

I’m saying that the people who failed to vote are not “the base,” they are most likely people who care about liberty and freedom, which is most certainly not the majority of the republican base. The Republicans spent over 10 years alienating those voters.

Timin203 on February 19, 2013 at 11:55 AM

Can’t really argue with that, but the base is in fact getting sick and tired of the out of control spending.

But if that’s the case, then why did the Republicans smoke the Dems in the 2010 midterms? Because the base turned out(along with indie voters and some disaffected Democrats) in droves. That could’ve been duplicated in 2012 but wasn’t. I personally thought Romney ran a far better general election campaign than McCain and was spectacular at the first debate, but he also pulled way too many punches and never consistently took it to Obama the way he needed to.

Doughboy on February 19, 2013 at 11:54 AM

2010 was an anomaly. The dems had just passed a wildly unpopular bill through shady means. They didn’t take the electoral threat seriously, so they didn’t rally their low info idiots to get out and vote, and a lot of people turned out to give the R’s one last chance. They failed miserably when they showed up in Washington.

I doubt the democrats will repeat their mistakes in 2014. Why do you think Obama’s campaign is still alive, fundraising, and shooting out “get involved!” emails weekly.

Regardless of what you point out being accurate or not, my point goes to the ignorance and denial that the choice in the last election was one of choosing between destroying the destruction of the republic by the political force of neo-coms or to stand up for the principles that America was founded on, with the important thing being to STOP the communists….and then argue about “purity” of principles.

This choice was a no brainer to me.

Mimzey on February 19, 2013 at 11:56 AM

What gave you the impression that Romney would govern in a way that was very different then how Obama governed?

That’s what I don’t understand. His statements, like McCains, and Bush’s (and Bush’s actions) make it pretty clear that he is for big government, he just thinks he can run it better than the democrats.